Pakistan - NAB controversy

For months, the federal government ignored charges made by Pakistan People’s Party’s (PPP) that federal institutions like the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) were overstepping their bounds and conducting affairs in Sindh in a manner that suggests political partisanship. However, now it appears that the PPP and Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) are finally converging. On February 16, Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif, sounding unusually irate, warned NAB against the wrongful persecution of many, including ‘honest’ government employees, stating that the watchdog had been descending on the offices and houses of innocent people, harassing and discrediting them under the guise of ensuring accountability. Instead, he urged them to take up cases after acquiring solid proofs through detailed investigation. For those wondering why the sudden shift in tone of the PM regarding the methodology adapted by NAB and assorted organisations after months of deflection, the answer lies in the fact that finally the eyes of NAB had started to peer into Punjab. NAB is pursuing cases against prominent members of PML-N, including the Punjab Education Minister Rana Mashhood. But perhaps what is truly motivating the PM’s ire is the fact that old cases against the PM and his brother, Punjab’s Chief Minister (CM) Shahbaz Sharif, are about to be rescued from their long standing limbo by NAB. Furthermore, the ‘jewels in the crown’ of CM Shahbaz’s latest tenure, i.e. the Metro Bus and Orange Line Metro Train, are also reported to be in the crosshairs of NAB. Following on from the PM’s remarks, Irfan Siddiqui, special assistant to the PM, stated that the government is mulling the enactment of a new law to keep an eye on NAB’s activities. He dubbed NAB’s performance as “zero” and said the watchdog worked under and was answerable to the government. Given its emboldened activities of late, it is perhaps surprising to note how quickly NAB has folded in response to the PM’s warning, thereby making the quest to clip its wings almost redundant. In a press release, NAB seemed to be praising the government, suggesting that the government’s non-interference had helped strengthen the organisation. Taking a conciliatory tone, the NAB chairman stated the organisation respected the opinion of the PM and that NAB was working on improving its accountability process in line with the criticisms and directions of PM Nawaz Sharif. Moreover, regret was expressed about the investigation process, and blame was laid at the door of “inheritance”, but assurances were given that problems would be rectified.

There are multiple layers to this ‘accountability’ controversy. On a principled level, there is no argument about the need for ‘accountability’ and there is merit in the opinion — most loudly voiced by stalwarts of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) – that a watchdog should be without political interference and independent in order to do its job effectively. However, a basic problem with the criticism of the PM’s rebuke is that it ignores exactly how accountability drives have panned out in the past. The fact remains, as we witnessed recently in Sindh, these drives are motivated by partisan interests and political opponents are targeted. Furthermore, the scope of accountability is limited only to politicians. For ‘accountability’ to be authentic it should encompass politicians, bureaucrats, judges and generals equally. The last three (in increasing order) mostly escape any scrutiny and it is only the politicians who are caricatured and targeted for being corrupt, which is a prevalent narrative harmful to the prospects of democracy. It is patently apparent that the manner in which NAB (and the FIA) conducts itself is not consistent with criminal investigation ethics and rules of procedure. Nonetheless, accepting this reality does not remove the problems inherent in having the executive branch exercising total control over a watchdog organisation. Indeed, seeing NAB fold so quickly in consequence of the PM’s anger shows the farce at the heart of these accountability drives. To solve this quandary, it is imperative under the given circumstances to have a parliamentary committee overseeing NAB’s affairs. This will go a long way in reducing the partisan nature of NAB and help reduce the perception that accountability drives are fundamentally politically motivated.